[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0 of 8] x86: use PTE_MASK consistently
    On Tue, 20 May 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
    > Here's a series to rationalize the use of PTE_MASK and remove some
    > amount of ad-hocery.
    > This gist of the series is:
    > 1. Fix the definition of PTE_MASK so that its equally applicable in
    > all pagetable modes
    > 2. Use it consistently
    > I haven't tried to address the *_bad() stuff, other than to convert
    > pmd_bad_* to use PTE_MASK.
    > This series has had some testing in the x86.git tree, and hasn't shown
    > any problems. Each patch is more or less absolutely trivial and the
    > series is very bisectable, to help track down any problems which might
    > arise (this area has always been a source of subtle problems).

    Yes, thanks Jeremy: I've checked that each stage builds and runs X on my
    boxes here, x86_32 and x86_32+PAE and x86_64. (So even 1/8 is enough to
    fix the PAT pte_modify issue, though 2/8 then fixes compiler warnings.)

    I'll leave it to you and Linus whether your way of defining PTE_MASK is
    satisfactory as is, or needs to be improved to his way. I've not tried
    his suggestion of doing the _PAGE_BIT definitions: certainly it's
    seemed odd to me that they were defined with L, but I've little
    appetite to mess around with them now myself.

    One thing I did do a few days ago, but not got around to posting,
    was the *_bad() stuff. I've retested and will post that now...


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-05-20 15:03    [W:0.022 / U:1.852 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site